Background of the Invention
[0001] The present invention relates to a new method and apparatus for flow control in a
packet-switched microprocessor-based computer system (uniprocessor), a network of
such computer systems; or a multiprocessor system. In particular, it relates to a
new flow control design which is a hybrid between circuit-switched and packet-switched
systems, and is dynamically or statically variable between the two.
[0002] The system of the invention, in its pure packet-switched form, operates in the same
manner as that described in applicant's issued United States Patent No. 5907485, "Method
and Apparatus for Flow Control in a Packet-Switched Computer System" by Ebrahim et
al., from which further details can be obtained.
[0003] Reliable and streamlined flow control of microprocessor transactions (including data
and/or instructions) in a computer system is necessary to prevent wasted operations
and assist the system to run efficiently. Typical packet-switched bus interfaces in
computer systems use negative acknowledgments, or back pressure techniques, for flow
control. This requires either the master issuing retried transactions due to negative
acknowledgments by slaves, or complex handshake signals to modulate the back pressure
as a function of dynamic changes in system resource availability.
[0004] Both of these methods are complex to implement and increase the bus latency by spending
extra clock cycles performing handshakes, re-arbitrating for the bus, re-scheduling
interconnect resources, etc.
[0005] Some systems avoid dynamic (negative) feedback (e.g. negative acknowledgments) altogether
by making all the receive queues of a large enough size, so that they can contain
the maximum number of transactions that can foreseeably be received by them. This
has the disadvantage that is makes the slaves more expensive and inherently non-scalable,
especially when there are several sources of requests with each making multiple requests.
This approach can also aggravate the system latency, on account of the very deep receive
queues.
[0006] As the rate of processor speed improvements continue to exceed that of memory speed
improvements, reducing interconnect latencies becomes ever more important to achieving
substantial gains in performance. It would be especially useful to arrive at a system
that avoids the use of negative feedback, to avoid the inefficiencies associated with
that approach, without paying in complexity, size and hardware costs by inflating
the sizes of the transaction receive queues.
[0007] Various flow control techniques for packet-switched systems have been created, such
as for telecommunication switch designs and data communication protocols. Most extant
designs use some form of dynamic feedback signal to throttle the sender, on either
(1) a link-by-link basis where each downstream node sends a feedback signal to the
upstream node, or (2) an end-to-end basis, where only the two end points of the communication
participate in flow control, and the presence or absence of feedback from the destination
is used by the sender to control its flow. Another method that has been proposed is
rate-based flow control, where the sender meters its rate of send at an agreed-upon
rate, and modulates it based on dynamic feedback signals sent to it by any point downstream.
Most packet-switched computer systems use link-by-link flow control protocol.
[0008] In link-by-link flow control, the downstream recipient asserts a feedback signal
to the upstream sender, indicating a buffer-full or congestion condition at the recipient.
The feedback signal can take one of several forms:
(a) a pulse signal causing the sender to back off for some time and retry again:
(b) a level signal causing the sender to not send, while the signal remains asserted;
or
(c) a stop-start two-message feedback from the destination to throttle and restart
the sender respectively. (Most existing packet-switched system buses use this method.)
[0009] Link-by-link flow control may also operate through credits issued by the downstream
recipient to the upstream sender, where the sender only sends as many requests as
the credits allow, and then stops until new credits are issued to it by the downstream
recipient. The downstream recipient dynamically modulates the number and frequency
of credits issued to the upstream sender, based on the recipient's receive queue capacity
as well as any other congestion conditions detected by the recipient. For a description
of such a system, see
The FCVC Proposal for ATM Networks, Proc. 1993 International Conf. on Network Protocols, pp. 116-127, by H. T. Kung et.
al.
[0010] Link-by-link flow control can also be accomplished by making the downstream queue
large enough to accommodate the maximum number or items it is contemplated ever to
have to receive. Hence there is no loss of items (requests), and no need to throttle
the upstream sender. This is an expensive, nonscalable solution.
[0011] End-to-end How control via absence or presence of feedback from the destination to
the source is implemented in the TCP sliding window protocol for flow control and
congestion management, as well as in BECN/FECN proposal for congestion control in
ATM networks.
[0012] One approach to flow control is to use a master device to keep track of the number
of transactions that it can issue with a predefined agreement of queue depths at its
interface to the interconnect, and the interconnect issuing an ACK (acknowledgment)
for each completed transactions as a means of flow control. In protocols that have
used this approach (HDLC and SDLC), the sender has no information about the capabilities
(notably, queue size) of the final recipient of the packet. In addition, such protocols
require that the queue depths be determined in advance, and hence are not scalable.
Also, this approach does not lend itself well to a multiprocessing environment, since
each processor (or master) would have to keep track of all the transactions of all
the other processors (or masters).
[0013] In a credits-based scheme, credits are issued by a downstream recipient to allow
new packets to be sent. Such a scheme has the disadvantages that: (1) credits are
issued as frequent and unsolicited feedback packets from one switch to another; and
(2) credits are modulated based on dynamic congestion conditions.
[0014] Thus, a new apparatus and method are needed, which accommodate uniprocessor, multiprocessor
and networked environments and provide for efficient, scalable and cost-effective
packet-switched transaction flow control.
[0015] A problem, however, with packet-switched flow control is that there can be overhead,
i.e. clock cycles utilized, in the negotiation for the availability of masters, slaves
and the datapath for the completion of transactions. In addition, in certain settings,
such as a uniprocessor system, certain transactions may not require -- or for certain
transactions it may not be desirable to use -- a packet-switched protocol. For instance,
in a uniprocessor system it may be desirable that all slave read requests should be
conducted as circuit-switched requests.
[0016] In a multiprocessor system, fast master devices may effectively be penalized by the
use of a packet-switched system, and it may thus be desirable to accelerate their
slave read procedures. e.g. where a graphics data is requested from a fast graphics
device.
[0017] It would be advantageous to provide a system wherein faster devices in a multimaster
system are given a priority procedure for given requests, particularly for slave read
requests.
Summary of the Invention
[0018] The present invention employs a method and apparatus for centralizing the flow control
decisions in a new system controller, which acts in conjunction with input and output
queues of the masters and slaves in the system. The system controller determines the
total queue sizes of all the queues in the system at initialization time, and permits
a master (e.g. a processor) to send a number of transaction requests only to the extent
of that total. The system of the invention classifies system interconnect queues as
request queues, read-data queues, and write-data queues, and determines rules of transfer
of both requests and data as loosely coupled events. An interconnect (system) controller
is connected between one or more masters (e.g. microprocessors) and the slave devices,
which may be I/O units, disk drives, memory, etc. The interconnect controller includes
a queue for each master, and each master includes a transaction counter indicating
the number of outstanding transaction requests from that master to the controller.
The interconnect controller additionally includes both request and write data queues
for each downstream slave, and a transaction counter indicating the number of outstanding
requests from the controller to that slave and the outstanding write data transfers
from some master to that slave.
[0019] The masters and the controller are prevented from issuing any transaction requests
(or to initiate a write-data transfer requests) downstream when the respective counter
indicates that the corresponding request or data queue downstream is full. When a
transaction is complete (e.g. upon the receipt of requested data read or consumption
of write data by the slave), the relevant counter is decremented to indicate the availability
of a place in the transaction queue or write-data queue.
[0020] Queue overflow and congestion conditions are thus avoided by prohibiting the master
or system controller from sending more transactions or data than the recipient has
space for. A hardware handshake is used both to signal completion of a data transfer
and to notify the master of one more available space in the downstream queue. The
handshake is thus not an unsolicited signal, as in a credits-based scheme, and the
signals are not based upon dynamic congestion.
[0021] The maximum queue sizes in the system are determined at initialization, and thus
are known before execution of any applications by the master(s). The masters and controller
thus have at all times information on the number of available spots in the queue immediately
downstream to be contrasted with a credits-based scheme, where the maximum queue sizes
are not known a priori, and the sender can only keep track of the credits issued to
it. The initialization sequence is software-driven (e.g. by a boot PROM), and the
queue sizes and depths are determined by this sequence, which provides adaptability
of the system to reconfigure it for different slaves (having different queue sizes)
or to configure out nonfunctioning queue elements.
[0022] The elimination of (advance or overflow) feedback signals in the present flow control
system reduces the interface latency, since there is no extra handshake, no rescheduling
or rearbitrating for resources, and no retries by the master. Hence a simpler design
is usable, which is easily scalable according to the number of processors, and the
slave queues can be downsized as desired for price/performance considerations and
desired bandwidth, without fear of losing any transactions due to smaller queue sizes.
Furthermore, a variety of systems ranging from small/inexpensive to large/expensive
can be designed from the same modular CPU and I/O interfaces by simply down- or up-scaling
(sizing) the respective queues and buffers in the interconnect, as desired. Since
the interconnect controller is custom-designed to accommodate a given set of masters
and slaves with a given range of queue sizes, the masters and slaves needn't be redesigned
at all. Because the system controller is relatively inexpensive, a number of different
controller designs can be utilized without appreciably raising the cost of the system
-- which would not be the case if the processors and slave devices needed modification.
[0023] The overall system design. and effort required to test and validate correct system
behavior under saturation conditions (when flow control is important) is also greatly
simplified.
[0024] The above-described packet-switched mechanism is combined with additional features
resulting in a dynamically configurable packet-switched and circuit-switched system.
All slave read requests may be designated as circuit-switched requests, so that data
transfers take place quickly and efficiently, without the need for the slave to respond
with ready signals.
[0025] When one or more processors or other master devices are added to the uniprocessor
system, this is detected by each system controller. Certain master devices may be
predesignated such that the corresponding system controllers respond to slave read
requests therefrom as circuit-switched requests. These requests are processed out
of turn, in advance of other transactions, to improve the overall performance of the
system.
Brief Description of the Drawings
[0026]
Figure 1 is a block diagram of a preferred embodiment of a computer system incorporating
the present invention.
Figure 1A is a block diagram of a more generalized embodiment of the a computer system
incorporating the invention.
Figure 2 is a more detailed diagram of a portion of the system shown in Figure 1.
Figures 3A-3B together constitute a flow chart illustrating a generalized implementation
of the method of the invention.
Figures 4-7 are block diagrams illustrating transaction flow control according to
the invention for different types of transactions.
Figure 8 is a flow chart illustrating the hybrid form of the invention, wherein both
packet-switched and circuit-switched transactions are processed.
Figure 9 is a block diagram illustrating transaction flow control in the hybrid circuit-switched
and packet-switched embodiment of the invention.
Description of the Preferred Embodiments
1. The Pure Packet-Switched Embodiment of the Flow Control System
[0027] The description of the invention in this Section I is of the purely packet-switched
embodiment of the present invention. The packet-switched embodiment is the subject
matter of the parent of the present application, and the description in Section II
below of the hybrid embodiment relies upon it.
[0028] Figure 1 is a top-level block diagram of a computer system 10 incorporating the present
invention. This diagram relates to a specific implementation of applicant's new Ultrasparc
Architecture, which is described fully in the document
UPA lnterconnect Architecture, by Bill van Loo, Satya Nishtala and Zahir Ebrahim. Sun Microsystems, Inc.'s internal
release version 1.1 of the UPA Interconnect Architecture has been submitted as Appendix
A to a related patent application by applicant, entitled "Packet-Switched Cache-Coherent
Multiprocessor System", Serial No. 08/415,175, by Ebrahirn et al. That patent application,
filed in the United States Patent Office on March 31, 1995, describes many of the
broader features of the UPA architecture, and is incorporated herein by reference.
[0029] The present invention uses a new system interconnect architecture and concomitant
new methods for utilizing the interconnect to control transaction requests and data
flow between master devices and slave or memory devices.
[0030] In Figure 1, the system 10 includes a UPA module 20 and an interconnect network or
module 25, which in different embodiments of the invention may or may not be connected
to the data path. The UPA module may include such devices as a processor 30, a graphics
unit 40, and an I/O unit 50. Other units may be included, and act as the master units
for the purposes of the present invention. A master interface is defined as the interface
for any entity initiating transaction requests; examples of such masters are a CPU
making memory requests, or an I/O channel and bridges making DMA requests.
[0031] In general, in this application a master is exemplified by a processor. However,
a master may be any transaction-requesting device, whether or not it includes a microprocessor.
Similarly, a "slave" refers herein to any device that can accept a transaction request,
including both memory and non-memory devices, etc., and including devices such as
processors and I/O controllers that may themselves act as masters.
[0032] For the purposes of this invention, a "transaction" may be defined as a request packet
issued by a master, followed by an acknowledgment packet (not necessarily a full packet,
depending upon the chosen implementation) from the recipient immediately downstream.
There may or may not be a data transfer accompanying a request packet, and the data
transfer may either occur on the same set of wires as the request packet, or on separate
datapath wires. This is described in greater detail below in connection with Figures
4-7.
[0033] A UPA port 60 couples the module 20 to a system interconnect controller (SC) 70,
which is in turn coupled to one or more slave interface(s) 80. The slave interface
may be an interface for memory (such as main memory), an I/O interface, a graphics
frame buffer, one or more bridges to other interconnection networks, or even a CPU
receiving transactions to be serviced. In general, any device that accepts transaction
requests for servicing may be given a slave interface 80 in accordance with the invention,
such as conventional memory device(s) 85 and/or standard I/O device(s) 95.
[0034] In a preferred embodiment, the system controller 70 and UPA interface 60 are carried
on the main processor chip, and the slave interface is on the motherboard, though
many variations are possible. More generally, each master (whether a processor or
some other device) has a UPA master interface, and each slave includes a UPA slave
interface. The system controller in each case resides with the system.
[0035] A datapath crossbar 90 is also included in the interconnect module 25, and is coupled
to the slave interface(s), the system controller 70, and the ports 60. The datapath
crossbar may be s simple bus or may be a more complicated crossbar. (The UPA ports
60 may be configured as part of either the UPA module 20 or the interconnect module
25.) The datapath unit 90 is used to transmit read and write data in a manner to be
described below.
[0036] One or more conventional memories or other data storage devices 85 and one or more
input/output (I/O) devices 95 forming part of the system 10 are provided for user
interface, data output, etc.; these various slave devices may include RAM, ROM, disk
drives, monitors, keyboards, track balls, printers, etc. They are coupled into the
interconnect module 25 via the slave interfaces 80. The "slave" designation means
in this case only that such devices accept requests from one or more processors and
fulfill those requests.
[0037] The interconnection network may in general take the form of a number of different
standard communication topologies that interconnect masters and slaves, such as a
point-to-point link, a single bus or multiple buses, or switching fabrics. The interconnect
may employ any of a number of conventional mechanisms for switching the transaction
request to a slave using one or more signal paths, and the switching may be based
either on the addressing information contained in the transaction request packet,
or on another protocol not necessarily dependent on the contents of the request packet.
There may be any amount of buffering, or no buffering, in the interconnect.
[0038] The preferred embodiment(s) of the invention shown in Figure 1 (and Figure 1A; see
discussion below) has a centralized controller that connects to all masters and all
slaves, and consequently has complete visibility to system request and data traffic.
An alternative embodiment involves the use of distributed controllers, in which case
it is desirable to maintain visibility, and in certain designs a maximum-capacity
queue size may be needed.
[0039] Figure 1A shows a more generalized block diagram of a system according to the invention.
Here, there are multiple masters (three exemplary masters M1-M3 being shown). These
masters may act in certain circumstances as slaves. For instance, if M1 is a processor
and M3 is an I/O controller, then M3 will often act as a slave to M1, as in the initialization
procedure described below. On the other hand, during a DMA (direct memory access)
operation, the I/O controller M3 will act as a master to a memory device, such as
any of one to many of memories represented as M1 ... M2 in Figure 1A.
[0040] Slave devices S1 ... S2 (which may be one, several or many slave devices) are also
provided, and the masters, memories and slaves are coupled via a system controller
75 in the same fashion as the system controller 70 is coupled to the master and slave(s)
in Figure 1. The SC 75 is coupled via a datapath control bus 77 to a datapath crossbar
(or interconnect) 92, as with the datapath crossbar 90 in Figure 1. The control bus
77 will typically be much narrower than the system or data buses; e.g. in a preferred
embodiment of applicant's system, the datapath is 72 or 144 bits wide, while the SC
datapath control bus may be only 8 bits wide.
[0041] As indicated above, the SC 75 has complete visibility to all masters, slaves, and
memory. The system controller need
not be on the datapath, but should have control over and visibility to the datapath.
[0042] The SC, masters, memories and slaves in Figure 1A are interconnected by address/control
(A/ctrl) lines as shown, which may be unique (dedicated, point-to-point links) address/control
lines or may be bussed together. Data may also be bussed or switch-connected. Address/control
and data lines/buses may share the same links, such as by providing shared address/data
buses.
[0043] A boot PROM 94 is connected by a bus to the I/O controller M3, which reads it upon
start-up to initialize the system in a conventional manner (e.g. to initialize the
CPU, registers, etc.), and in addition to initialize the queues, registers and counters
of the present invention. The initialization procedure is described in detail below
relative to Figure 4.
[0044] Figure 2 illustrates an interconnect module 100 in a specific implementation where
two master interfaces (or "masters") 110 and 120, a single system controller (SC)
130, two slaves interfaces (or "slaves") 140 and 150, and a datapath crossbar 155
are used. There may in principle any number of masters and slaves. The masters may
be any of the interfaces discussed above, or in general any devices or entities capable
of issuing transaction requests.
[0045] Each slave 140 and 150 includes a slave queue (160 and 170, respectively) for receiving
transaction requests. The maximum sizes of these slave queues are represented by values
in port ID registers 180 and 190, respectively.
[0046] Masters 110 and 120 include data queues or buffers 115 and 125, and slaves 140 and
150 include data queues or buffers 185 and 195, whose functions are described in detail
relative to Figures 6 and 7 below. The maximum sizes of the slave write data queues
185 and 195 are also represented by values in port ID registers 180 and 190. respectively.
In.the special case where there is a one-to-one correspondence to a request queue
entry (e.g. 100) and a data buffer in the write data queue (e.g. 185), with the write
data queue being maximally dimensioned to hold an entire packet (i.e. dimensioned
such that it can hold the largest contemplated packet size), then the queue size in
180 can be represented by a single number.
[0047] In Figure 2 the slaves 140 and 150 may be any of the slave devices described above
with respect to slave 80 in Figure 1, and in particular slaves 140 and 150 may represent
any number of memory or non-memory slave devices.
Initialization Operation
[0048] The basic steps that take place at initialization include:
- (1) determine the sizes of the respective receive queues of all the slaves coupled
to the system;
- (2) store the sizes of the slave receive queues in registers within the system controller;
- (3) determine the sizes of the system controller's receive queues; and
- (4) store the sizes of the system controller receive queues in predetermined registers
in the master(s).
[0049] Thus, at system initialization, the initialization software reads the contents of
the size fields for the request queue and write data queue in each slave, and then
copies these values into corresponding fields inside the configuration (config) register
200 of the SC 130. In one embodiment, the values in ID registers 170 and 180 (representing
the slave queue sizes) are stored in separate fields in configuration ("config") register
200 of the SC 130. In addition, the values of the SCID registers 255 and 265 (representing
the SC queue sizes) are stored in config registers 270 and 280, respectively, of the
master interfaces 110 and 120.
[0050] Alternatively, config register 200 may be replaced by a separate configuration register
for each UPA port implemented in the given SC. In this case, there would be two separate
config registers, one for each of slaves 140 and 150.
[0051] The masters 110 and 120 also include transaction request output queues 290 and 300,
respectively, which are used to queue up transaction requests from each of the master
interfaces to the SC 130. Each master 110 and 120 has a counter (310 and 320) used
to track the number of pending transaction requests, as described below.
[0052] The SC 130 is provided with output queues 210 and 220 and associated counters 230
and 240, respectively, whose operation will be described below.
[0053] The SC 130 also includes an SC instruction (or transaction request) queue (SCIQ)
for each master, so in this case there are two SCIQ's 250 and 260. Associated with
each SCIQ is an SCID register, namely registers 255 and 265, respectively containing
a value representing the maximum size of the associated SCIQ.
[0054] The circuitry for carrying out the operations of the SC is indicated by SC logic
module 245 in Figure 2, and may include conventional hardwired and/or software logic
for carrying out the necessary functions. For instance, an ASIC may be provided for
carrying out the transaction request handling, queue control, numerical comparisons
and counting, etc. that are used in the invention. Alternatively, a general purpose
processor could be used, configured (such as by program instructions stored in an
associated conventional memory, e.g. ROM or RAM) to execute the functions discussed
herein.
[0055] Many combinations of standard hardware and software are possible to execute these
functions in the system controller; and the same is true of the functions carried
out in the slave devices (see slave logic modules 142 and 152) and the master devices
(see master logic modules 112 and 122). Here, the logic modules represent all of the
circuitry, programming, memory and intelligence necessary to carry out the functions
of the invention as described; assembling the hardware and software to do so is a
matter of routine to one skilled in the art, given the teaching of this invention.
(Where a master device is a processor, the logic for implementing the present invention
can of course be made up in large part of the processor itself and the instructions
it executes.) The particular implementation of these logic modules, and the extent
to which it is represented by software or hardware, are widely variable and thus shown
only in block form in Figure 2.
[0056] The initialization sequence will now be described with reference to Figures 1A and
2 (for the architecture) and Figures 6-7 (for the flow control of the initialization
sequence). The instructions for the initialization sequence are stored in nonvolatile
memory, in this embodiment in the boot PROM 94. The processor M1 has a fixed address
to the boot PROM 94, and accesses it by a read request over address/control line A/ctrl-1
to the SC 75. The SC sends the request via the datapath control line or bus 96 (which
may be an 8-bit bus) to the datapath crossbar 92, which in turn accesses the I/O controller
M3. The I/O controller thus acts as a slave to the processor M1 in this operation.
[0057] (It should be noted throughout the present description that for the sake of clarity
split address and data buses are assumed and illustrated; however, the present invention
is equally applicable to systems using shared address/data buses.)
[0058] The I/O controller M3 accesses the boot PROM 94 to read the code for the initialization
sequence, and sends it via line A/ctrl-3 to the SC 75, which sends it on to the processor
M1.
[0059] In Figure 1A, the SC 75, masters M1-M3, slaves S1-S2 and memories Meml-Mem2 include
the config registers, counters, SCID registers. ID registers, master queues, SCIQ's,
and slave queues as depicted in Figure 2; however, for the sake of clarity these elements
are not shown in Figure 1A.
[0060] Once the processor M3 has retrieved the initialization sequence instructions from
the boot PROM 94, they are executed. The first operation is to read the ID registers
of the memories and slaves. These ID registers, as described above with respect to
Figure 2, contain the values of the respective slaves' instruction queues and write
data queues. The flow control sequence that is followed for this read operation follows
that described below for the Slave Read Flow Control in Figure 6, the data from the
ID registers being retrieved via a data bus (or datapath) 715.
[0061] The ID register values are written to the config registers (such as config register
200) of the system controller (75 in Figure 1A. 130 in Figure 2). As discussed above,
there is one config register per slave, or at least one field in a config register
for each slave. The flow sequence followed for this write operation is as discussed
below relative to Figure 7. The I/O controller for the system is used for this purpose.
Thus, assuming in Figure 7 that for this operation the slave 710 is the I/O controller,
the master (in this case, a processor) 700 causes the SC 720 to write the ID register
values from each slave to its own config registers. In each case, the respective ID
register value is stored in a buffer of the processor (master 700 in Figure 7 or master
M 1 in Figure 1A), and this value is passed to the system controller to the I/O controller
(slave 710 in Figure 7 or master/slave M3 in Figure 1A), which then writes it right
back to the system controller via the datapath provided for that purpose (data bus
715 in Figure 7).
[0062] The next step in the initialization procedure is to read the sizes of the receive
queues of the system controller (e.g. the SCIQ's 0 and 1 shown in Figure 7 or SCIQ's
250 and 260 in Figure 2). The receive queue sizes are stored in the SCID registers
(see registers 255 and 265 shown in Figure 2). This read operation is executed using
the I/O controller of the system, resulting in the master/processor storing the SC
receive queue values in a buffer or preassigned register.
[0063] Finally, these SCIQ sizes are written into the master config registers (such as 270
and 280 in Figure 2). If the system is a uniprocessor system, then this amounts the
processor writing the SCID values to its own config register and to the config registers
of other devices that can act as masters. If it is a multiprocessor system, then one
processor acts as a master and writes SCID values to both its own config register
and to those of the other processors.
General Operation of flow Control
[0064] Below is a generalized description of transaction request flow control in the present
invention, followed by a more specific description of the preferred embodiment of
the invention including details as to the initialization sequence and flow control
for specific types of transaction requests.
[0065] After initialization of the config register 200 in the SC 130 and the config registers
270 and 280 in the masters, normal operation of the system 100 can commence. During
operation, the SC maintains in its config register 200 a copy of the respective values
of the slave ID registers 180 and 190, and hence "knows" the maximum number of transaction
requests that each slave interface can handle in its slave request queue (160 or 170),
and the maximum amount of data that can be held in its slave data queue (185 or 195).
At any given time, the counters 230 and 240 store the number of pending transaction
requests in the corresponding slave request queue, and the size of the pending store
data in the slave store data queue. Unissued transaction requests may in some circumstances
be stored for the slaves 140 and 150 in output queues 210 and 220, which may be arbitrarily
large, and in particular may be larger than the SCIQ's 250 and 260. In other circumstances,
requests remain enqueued in corresponding SCIQ's.
[0066] When a master, e.g. master interface 110, has a transaction request to issue, it
first compares the value in its counter 310 with the value in the config register
270. If the counter value is less than the config register value, then the request
may be issued. The request is sent from the master's output queue 290 to the SCIQ
250, and the counter 310 is incremented by one.
[0067] The SC 130 then determines to which of the two slaves 140 and 150 the transaction
request is destined, and checks the counter for that queue. For instance, if slave
140 is the destination for the transaction request, then the SC 130 checks the counter
210 and compares the value stored there with the value in the config register 200
corresponding to the ID register 180. If the counter 230 value is less than the value
stored in the config register, then the SC 130 issues the transaction request and
increments the counter 230. Otherwise, the transaction request is maintained in the
output queue 210. (In some transactions related to ordering constraints for transactions
for different requests from the same master, it may be desirable to leave the request
in the SCIQ 250.)
[0068] Assuming the transaction request is issued in this example, then the SC 130 sends
a signal to the master 110 to this effect (upon completion of the transaction, e.g.
the transfer of data) and removes the transaction request from its input queue 250
(upon sending of the reply). The master 110 accordingly decrements its counter 310,
which enables it to issue an additional pending transaction request. If the counter
310 was at its maximum (indicating that the SCIQ 250 was full), the decrementation
of the counter 310 allows room for a single additional transaction request from the
master 110 to the SC 130. If the counter 310 was not at its maximum value, then the
decrementation of the counter 310 simply adds one to the number of transaction requests
available to the master interface 110.
[0069] The output queues 210 and 220, which may be arbitrarily large in size (and in particular
may be much larger, if desired, than SCIQ's 250 and 260 and slave input queues 160
and 170) are preferable but not necessary to the operation of the present invention.
If separate output queues are not kept for the two slaves (queue 210 for slave 140
and queue 220 for slave 150), or if ordering constraints for the master prevent the
use of both queues 210 and 220, then the transaction requests stored at queues 250
and 260 must wait until the respective destination slaves can accept them before being
cleared out of their queues.
[0070] Such ordering constraints in the system may be global ordering requirements. That
is, in a particular system it may be required that a pending transaction in queue
210 from master 110 (intended for slave 140) be processed before a succeeding transaction
from master 110 intended for slave 150 can be processed.
[0071] Aside from such an ordering requirement, or assuming the pending transactions in
SCIQ's 250 and 260 are from different masters, then either of these queues 250 and
260 can release a request for either slave 140 and 150 via the SC output queues 210
and 220, thereby allowing an increase in throughput. For instance, a slave 140 request
in SCIQ 260 can be sent to SC output queue 210 even if slave 140 is full (i.e. its
input queue 170 is full), and a succeeding slave 150 request from SCIW 260 can then
be sent to slave 150. If the SC output queues were not provided, then the slave 150
request would have to wait for slave 140 to clear before being issued. The SC output
queues thus provide truly independent operation of the two slave interfaces.
[0072] The SCIQ's 250 and 260 are independent of one another, as are the master interfaces
and their respective counters. Thus, the SC 130 is configured to handle a predetermined
number of requests from each of the masters, with the number of requests that can
be accepted from each master being independent of the other(s): that is, the sizes
of the SCIQ's are independent of one another. In addition, it is possible that an
individual master may be capable of multiple requests independent of others from that
master, so the request queue 290 (or 300) and corresponding SCIQ 250 (or 260) can
in each case be split into multiple queues.
[0073] Any master can request transactions to any slave via the SC, for any selected number
of master and slaves. The SC will typically be an ASIC configured for a given system
with a predetermined maximum number of master and slave interfaces. Since it is a
relatively simple and inexpensive ASIC (by comparison with the system as a whole),
it provides great flexibility and economy by allowing designers to easily configure
different SC's at low cost for different systems, each one tailored to the specific
needs of that system.
[0074] The logic for the carrying out of the invention is provided by hardware/firmware
logic of the SC ASIC and the master and slave interfaces, and by program instructions
stored in memory 85 of the system, as shown in Figure 1. Alternative embodiments may
implement the logic in other fashions, e.g. by providing memories and general purpose
processors to carry out any of the steps executed by the master interfaces, system
controller and slave interfaces of the preferred embodiment of this invention.
[0075] Such logic (hardware or software) may generally be referred to as "logic modules"
coupled to their respective processors, system controllers, slaves, or other system
component, indicating that such modules and their concomitant functions may be implemented
as either hardware or software or some combination thereof. In the case of software
which is executed on hardware logic (including processors), being "coupled to" a component
means stored in registers and/or memory as necessary and executed in a conventional
manner.
Operation of the System Controller
[0076] Referring now to Figures 3A-3B, at initialization (box/method step 400) all UPA port
ID registers (e.g. the slave ID registers 180 and 190 in Figure 2) are read, and their
contents are written into the appropriate fields in the SC config register 200 (or
into separate, dedicated config registers, as discussed above). The separate fields
in a single SC config register embodiment is more likely to be used when the UPA (slave)
ports are configured with a PROM instead of a port ID register. In the present application,
whenever fields of the config register are referred to, it may be taken alternatively
to mean separate config registers, and vice versa.
[0077] At box 410, the master registers are now initialized, which involves reading the
SCID registers 255 and 265 and writing the SCIQ sizes (stored in those registers)
in the respective config registers 270 and 280.
[0078] Since at start-up the config registers 200 fields and the config registers 270-280
must allow at least one transaction apiece (to read their corresponding ID registers
180-190 and 250-260, respectively), they are initialized to a value of "1" to begin
with, to "bootstrap" the start-up. Then, when the read-ID-registers transaction requests
are issued, and the counters are decremented, the requests will be allowed. (If the
config registers were all at 0, no transactions would be allowed.) Upon the reading
of the respective ID registers, the config register values are replaced with the correct
values, i.e. the actual sizes of their associated ID registers.
[0079] At box 420, it is determined whether a new transaction request is pending in one
of the masters, e.g. the master 120. If not, the procedure stops at box 422 (but may
recommence at box 420 at any time that a new transaction request is made).
[0080] At box 424, if the pending transaction request is for a read operation, then the
system determines whether the master read data buffer (discussed in greater detail
below) for the master interface is ready to accept data, i.e. whether there is sufficient
room in the master read data buffer to receive the data to be read. If not, then the
system waits as at box 426 until the master read data buffer is ready. Note that a
write operation need not be held up during a wait period for a read operation, but
may proceed independently; and vice versa.
[0081] For a write operation, the system determines whether the data to be written to one
of the slaves via a slave interface or memory is in fact ready for writing in (transmission
to) a master write buffer. If not, again at box 426 a wait period is executed, until
the data item is ready for writing.
[0082] When either the read or the write operation is ready for execution as far as the
master interface is concerned, then at box 430 the system tests whether the value
of the master counter (in this example, counter 320) or equal to the value stored
in the config register, i.e. the size of the associated SCIQ 260 (as originally provided
by the SCID register 265). (The master counter should never be able to exceed the
value stored in the config registers, but in case it did this could be taken into
account by using a "≥" instead of "=" in the comparison test.) If the counter has
not issued requests equal to the total SCIQ 260 size, then this test will be false
and the method proceeds to box 440.
[0083] If the counter value has reached its maximum allowable value, then the transaction
request will not be passed on to the SC, and the method proceeds to box 500. In this
case, the transaction request pending in the master interface is required to wait
(box 510) until a complete-transaction signal has been received from the SC before
it can be issued. In a preferred embodiment, this complete-transaction signal takes
the form of an S_REPLY signal, discussed in detail below with respect to Figures 4-7.
[0084] When this complete-transaction signal is received by the master interface 110 (box
500), the master interface decrements the counter associated with that SCIQ (box 530)
and proceeds to the step at box 440.
[0085] At box 440, the counter 320 is incremented by one, and at box 450 the transaction
request is sent by the master to the SC. Thus, the counter 320 now reflects the sending
of one (or one additional) transaction request.
[0086] It will be appreciated that boxes 420-450 and 500-520 all relate to method steps
that are carried out by or in the master or master interface, such as master interfaces
110 and 120. It will be seen below that boxes 452-458 and 462-490 (i.e. almost all
of Figure 3B) relate to method steps carried out in or by the system controller (SC).
Boxes 460 and 495 relate to the method steps of reading and writing data as appropriate.
[0087] The SC is provided with intelligence and/or logic (hardware and/or software) to determine
whether it has a transaction request pending in its request receive queue (such as
SCIQ's 250 and 260). If so, then at box 452 the transaction request at the head of
the queue is examined to determine which slave is intended as the recipient for the
request. This queue control and recipient determination is carried out in a conventional
manner.
[0088] At box 454 (Figure 3A), the method determines whether the pending operation is a
memory operation or a non-memory slave operation. If it is a memory operation, then
at box 456 the method determines whether the recipient memory is valid, given global
or other ordering constraints.
[0089] Some such possible constraints relate to delaying the processing of a memory or slave
request by a given master until any requests to any other memory or slave, respectively,
by that same master are resolved. That is, from a given master, e.g. master 1, a series
of transaction requests to slave 1 may issue, and then a transaction request may be
issued for slave 2. A preferred embodiment of the present system ensures that all
of the pending slave 1 requests (from master 1) are completed before the new slave
2 request is executed. This ensures any slave 1 action upon which the new slave 2
transaction might rely will have taken place. Thus, strong global ordering of transaction
requests from a given master with respect to requests issued to different slaves is
maintained. This is accomplished by requiring the master to await a signal called
S_REP from slave 1 before issuing the slave 2 request, discussed below.
[0090] In other systems, it may be preferable to allow master 1 to freely issue multiple
request to slave 1 without awaiting an S_REPLY (transaction-complete) signal from
slave 1. Even in such systems, there may be ordering or other constraints upon transactions
that can temporarily disallow given memories or non-memory slaves from accepting certain
transactions, either of predetermined transaction types or from particular masters,
or both, or for some other reasons.
[0091] If for any of these reasons the recipient memory is not valid or available at this
time, then at box 458 the method waits until the memory is valid and available.
[0092] If the recipient memory is valid, then at box 460 the data is read or written to/from
memory as required, and the S_REPLY (transaction complete) signal is sent, as described
in greater detail below.
[0093] If the pending transaction is a non-memory slave transaction, then at box 462 the
method determines which slave is to receive the request. At box 464, it is determined
whether the recipient slave is a valid recipient at this time, given the ordering
or other constraints mentioned above. If not, at box 466 the method waits until the
slave is valid.
[0094] Once the slave is valid for this transaction, then the transaction request is moved
into the corresponding SC output queue (SCOQ) 210 or 220.
[0095] If the pending transaction is a slave write transaction, than at this time (box 470)
the SC enables the datapath 155 via a datapath control signal, and the master (whose
transaction is pending) is then able to move the data through the datapath to the
appropriate slave input queue (185 or 195). The SC then sends its transaction-complete
(S_REPLY) signal to both the master and the slave (see discussion below relative to
Figure 7).
[0096] At box 475, the SC 130 then checks the counter for the recipient slave, e.g. counter
240 if slave 150 is the destination for the pending transaction request. If the counter
equals or exceeds the value in the config register (i.e the size indicated by the
ID register 180 or 190, which were read at initialization), then the request is not
yet allowed. In this case, then steps 530-550 are followed (essentially identical
to steps 500-520), until a free line opens up in the destination slave queue to receive
the transaction request.
[0097] If the appropriate counter (230 or 240) has not reached its maximum allowed value,
then it is incremented by one (box 480), and the transaction request is sent to the
recipient slave (box 490).
[0098] If the pending transaction is a slave read request then at this point (box 495) the
read operation is initiated. When it is complete, the slave sends a P_REPLY to the
SC, and the SC sends S_REPLY's to both the requesting master and the recipient slave.
See the discussion below relating to Figure 6 below for details about the transaction
and data flow for slave read requests.
[0099] At this point, the method then proceeds to box 420 in Figure 3A, i.e. it is determined
whether another transaction request is made.
[0100] The flow chart of Figures 3A-3B does not necessarily indicate a strictly linear sequence
with respect to different transactions (though for a given transaction the flow is
linear); e.g. in preferred embodiments a transaction request can be allowed to issue
from one of the master interfaces even as another transaction request is issued by
the SC to a slave interface. Other types and degrees of parallel operation may be
implemented.
Flow control.
[0101] Figures 4-7 illustrate how flow control takes place in the present invention for
each of four different types of transactions:
Figure 4: read operation from memory (i.e. where the slave interface is a memory interface;
Figure 5: write operation to memory;
Figure 6: read operation from a device other than memory; and
Figure 7: write operation from a device other than memory.
[0102] Other operations, such as cached read transactions (which involve the snoopbus, not
a focus of the present invention) are possible, but these will suffice to illustrate
the features of the present invention.
[0103] In Figures 4 and 5, for the sake of simplicity the queues and registers illustrated
in Figure 2 are not shown, but should be understood to be included in both the master
interfaces (UPA ports) and system controller, in essentially the same configuration
as in Figure 2. Thus, the transaction control described above with respect to Figures
2 and 3 is accomplished also with respect to Figures 4-5. as well as 6-7.
[0104] However, the memory banks shown in Figures 4 and 5 need not include slave queues
as shown in Figure 2, nor does the system controller in Figure 4 need to include a
config register and counters as in Figure 2; rather, conventional flow control as
between a read- or write- transaction requesting device and memory may be utilized,
and will be implementation-specific. Many standard designs that ensure that read and
write requests are properly meted out to the memory banks will be appropriate. In
this example, steps (boxes) 470-490 and 530-550 in Figures 3A-3B are replaced by equivalent
steps for control of read and write transactions to and from the memories.
[0105] In Figure 4, a specific embodiment of an interconnect module 600 is illustrated,
where memory banks 610 ... 620 are the slave devices, with a total of
m memory banks being indicated by the subscripts (0) ... (m-1). There are likewise
multiple master interfaces (UPA ports) 630 ... 640, in the present example 32 master
interfaces being indicated by the subscripts 0 ... 31. A datapath crossbar 625 couples
the memory banks to the UPA ports in a conventional manner.
[0106] As a rule, in this operation the order of reception of the transaction requests will
be the order of reply by the slave interfaces.
[0107] In general in Figures 4-7, the order of events is indicated by the circled event
numerals 1. 2, 3 and 4 (with accompanying arrows indicating the direction of data
or signal flow), as the case may be for each figure. With the exception of the fact
that the memories in Figures 4 and 5 do not include the slave queues and ID register
of the slaves shown in Figure 2, the following description of data flow with respect
to Figures 4-7 should be understood to include the steps described with respect transaction
request control (see Figures 3A-3B). Thus, for each request issued, the appropriate
counter consultation, incrementation and decrementation is carried out to determine
that the request is sent at an appropriate time. The respective queues are also handled
as appropriate.
Memory Read Requests: Figure 4
[0108] This read request example assumes that data is coming from memory, and not, e.g.,
from a cache. Snoop operations on the snoopbus shown in Figure 4 are not in consideration
here.
Event 1: When a UPA master port such as post 630 has a read-from-memory transaction ready,
and the master counter is not at its allowed maximum (see box 430 in Figures 3A-3B),
the read transaction is issued on the UPA_Addressbus from UPA port 630 to the system
controller 650. This is indicate by the event 1 (P_REQ) along the UPA_Addressbus 660
in Figure 4, with the direction of the information indicated by the arrow, i.e. from
the port to the SC.
Event 2: The memory cycle [i.e. RAS (read-address-strobe)/CAS (column-address-strobe) request
issuance] is issued over memory control bus 670 to the memory banks 610 ... 620. See
vent 2 ("RAS/CAS") along bus 670.
Event 3: The datapath is scheduled by a signal along the datapath control bus 680. and data
items are accordingly delivered from memory to the datapath crossbar 625 via a memory
databus 690 and UPA databus 700. This fulfills the read request.
Memory Write Requests: Figure 5
[0109] Figure 5 depicts the same circuit as Figure 4, but the flow is different because
it relates to a (non-cached) write operation instead of a read operation. Event 1
is the issuance of the write request along the UPA address bus 660.
[0110] In event 2, the datapath control signal over the bus 680 is sent to enable the datapath
crossbar 625. Also, an S_REPLY is sent over bus 710 by the SC 650 to the UPA port
630 to source the data after the datapath is scheduled, and the data items are sent
from the UPA port 630 to the datapath crossbar over data bus 700. Here, they are buffered,
in preparation for forwarding to the memory banks. At this point, the counter in the
UPA port is decremented to show that another transaction request is available to the
system controller.
[0111] In event 3, the memory banks are enabled via bus 670 using RAS/CAS signals, and data
items are sent via bus 690 to the memory banks. This completes the write operation.
[0112] The foregoing method ensures that no write request is issued until the write data
are ready. E.g., if the databus 695 is 144 bits wide, but the bus 690 is 288 bits
wide, the data words are buffered in the crossbar, assembled into 288-bit blocks,
and then written to memory.
Slave Read Requests: Figure 6
[0113] Figure 6 illustrates a read sequence to a slave device other than memory, and is
similar to Figure 2, but for this example a single master interface 710 and a single
slave interface 720 are used, coupled by a system controller 720 and a datapath crossbar
730.
[0114] Event 1 indicates the issuance of a read request P_REQ on UPA address bus 740 to
SC 720.
[0115] In event 2, the SC 720 sends the P_REQ on address/control bus 750 to the slave interface
710. To do this, if there are several slave interfaces, the SC must first decode the
address to ensure that the P_REQ goes to the correct slave interface. Event 2 informs
the slave interface to prepare the data to move through the datapath.
[0116] When the data items are ready, then event 3 takes place, namely the sending of a
P_REPLY from the slave 710 to the SC 720 over bus 760.
[0117] In event 4, a series of steps are executed to cause the master interface to receive
the data: SC 720 schedules the datapath 730, and issues an S_REPLY over bus 770 to
the master interface 700. In addition, the SC issues the S_REPLY over bus 780 to the
slave 710, to drive the data, when it is ready, on the slave's UPA databus 790 via
the datapath and over the databus 800 to the master interface 700.
Slave Write Requests: Figure 7
[0118] Figure 7 shows the identical apparatus as Figure 6, but illustrates a write sequence
from a non-memory slave interface to a master interface. This sequence ensures that
data cannot be transferred until the data queue PREQ_DQ of the slave interface 710
has sufficient space.
[0119] In Figures 6 and 7, both a transaction request counter 810 and a data queue counter
820 are shown in the SC 720. These are counters to determine how full the PREQ queue
and PREQ_DQ queue (slave output data queue) are, respectively If these two queues
are of different sizes, then their associated counters 810 and 820 are of different
sizes. If these two queues are the same size, then a single counter may be used in
the SC to monitor how full both queues are.
Event 1: The first event of the write operation is that a P_REQ is issued by the master interface
700 to the system controller 720 over bus 740.
Event 2: In event 2, the SC issues the P_REQ over address/control bus 750 to the slave interface
710. The P_REQ includes sufficient words to inform the SC how much data is being written.
As mentioned above, the slave data queue counter 820 is used to track how full the
data queue PREQ_DQ is. If the PREQ_DQ queue is too full, then the write transaction
must wait.
The data queue PREQ_DQ may be the width of one word (e.g. 16 bits) or a block (e.g.
64 bits). Multiple transfer sizes are thus supported in the current system. Possible
queue organizations include the maximum capacity per request, or some fraction of
the maximum capacity per request, e.g. the 64-bit and 16-bit examples cited above.
If the queue PREQ_DQ is sufficiently available, then the write operation may proceed.
Further in event 2, the SC schedules the datapath 730 with a datapath control signal
"DP ctrl", and issues an S_REPLY to the master interface over bus 770 to drive the
data on its data bus 800. In addition, the SC issues the S_REPLY over bus 780 to tell
the slave interface 710 to receive the data over its data bus 790.
The transaction is complete as far as the master interface is concerned once it has
received the S_REPLY and the data has been transferred over the bus 800 to the datapath
crossbar 730. Thus, at this point, even though the slave interface may not yet have
received the data, the master interface is prepared for an additional transaction.
Since the address and data paths are independent, the request packet (which includes
the destination address) and the corresponding data may be forwarded in any order
to the slave port. That is, the data might actually arrive at the input queue PREQ_DQ
before the P_REQ arrives at the queue PREQ of the slave. If this happens, the data
will have to wait until the P_REQ arrives, so that the slave can determine the destination
address for the data. Alternatively, of course, the P_REQ may arrive first, and the
data second, in which case it can immediately be written to the destination address
specified by the P_REQ.
Event 3: Once the slave has cleared the requested data from its data queue and the transaction
request from its input queue, it issues a P_REPLY over bus 760 to the SC, indicating
that it is ready for another transaction. The SC decrements its counters 810 and 820
accordingly. The transaction is now complete from the SC's point of view; i.e. there
are no more actions to be taken by the SC.
Transaction Ordering
[0120] The transactions herein are any type of request by a master device or module (hardware,
software, or a combination). These include read-data transfers, write-data transfers,
etc., which must be connected with the read and write replies. That is, for example,
each write request is logically linked to write data (i.e. data to be written). While
in the foregoing description the ordering of data transfer has been assumed to be
governed by the order of write requests, other possibilities exist.
[0121] For instance, a link between a write request and the write data may be accomplished
by assigning tokens to each write request and its corresponding data. The tokens would
then be used to inform the system controller and processor of the completion of a
given write request; that is, the write data carries its token along with it, and
when it is received the write request having the associated token is known to be complete.
Such a system requires token match logic to locate the associated tokens. The token
system can be applied to the system controller operation described above for any transactions
requested by a master, and frees up the ordering requirement of transaction request
vis-a-vis completion of the requests; that is, read and write transactions may be
carried out in an order other than the order in which they were issued.
[0122] In any case, for each transaction there will be a corresponding reply by the system
controller, whether or not there is a data transfer. As a general matter, the order
of events for various transactions will be:
Read from slave: read request --> slave read reply --> read data transfer (optional)
Write from master: write request --> SC write reply --> write data transfer (optional)
Write from slave: (write request/write data transfer, in either order) --> slave reply when write data
is consumed
[0123] Thus, the present system is adaptable to many different ordering schemes, or indeed
to schemes such as a token system where no particular ordering is required.
II. The Hybrid Circuit-Switched and Packet-Swirched Embodiment of the Flow Control System
[0124] Figure 8 shows a hybrid method 900 using variations in the steps shown in Figures
3A and 3B. Method 900 allows the flow control system of the invention to treat some
transactions as packet-switched and others as circuit-switched.
[0125] In the system as described in Section I above, the system controller will take a
variable amount of time to respond to different transaction requests, from one to
several clock cycles, depending on how full the queues are, how busy the slaves are,
and so on. On a slave read request, there is an additional delay of perhaps two cycles
to schedule the datapath, and a further delay of perhaps two clock cycles between
the time the S_REPLY is sent from the SC to the master and the time that the data
is actually provided to the master on the datapath. Thus, a slave read request may
take on the order of ten clock cycles to complete, which can limit the overall band-with
for data flow in the system.
[0126] In a uniprocessor system, it helps to treat all slave read requests as circuit-switched
transactions. i.e. immediately schedule the data transfers from the slave to the processor,
without waiting for other transaction of that slave to be completed.
[0127] Figure 8 should be read in light of Figures 3A-3B, which give the detailed transaction
flow in the non-hybrid system. Transaction flow in the hybrid system is carried out
in the same fashion, with the variations described below. At box 910, a master issues
a P_REQ to its SC, in the manner described in Section I. At box 920, the SC takes
into account flow control and ordering restraints in the same manner, and when the
P_REQ reaches the head of its SCIQ, the SC arbitrates for the address bus, to forward
the requests to the designated slave. In Figure 9, which illustrates the flow control
of the method of Figure 8, step 910 corresponds to event 1 (along bus 740), and step
920 corresponds to event 2 ("Arb").
[0128] At box 930, the SC determines whether this transaction should be designated as a
circuit-switched transaction. This can happen in a variety of ways. In a uniprocessor
system, preferably all slave read requests (or some other predesignated subset of
transaction requests) will automatically be designated as circuit-switched.
[0129] In a multiprocessor system or a system with certain master devices that are reliably
faster than others, the fast devices can be predesignated as "circuit-switched" masters,
so that all slave read requests (or other desired transactions) from those particular
devices are designated as circuit-switched.
[0130] A uniprocessor system to which one or more processors are added can automatically
reconfigure itself from the uniprocessor embodiment (where all slave read requests
are circuit-switched) to the multiprocessor embodiment (where additional criteria
may come into play) by detecting the presence of the additional processor(s) and providing
this information to the SC. This provides an adaptive, self-reconfiguring mechanism,
operating in a uniprocessor mode whenever only one processor (or, more generally,
one master) is present and in multiprocessor mode whenever more than one processor
(or master) is present in the computer system.
[0131] Thus, when a second processor is plugged into a uniprocessor system, the system controller
and control software automatically make decisions as to circuit-switched or packet-switched
statuses of requests based upon different criteria than when the system had only one
processor. The user who plugs in the microprocessor need take no other steps to make
this happen; adding the processor automatically causes the system to convert to the
multiprocessor mode, and removing it (or making a determination that only one processor
is available or functional) returns the system to the uniprocessor mode.
[0132] Alternatively or in addition to the foregoing, all slave read requests to particular
predetermined slaves (ideally, fast slaves such as a fast 64-bit PCI device) can be
designated to be circuit-switched. Dynamic decision-making capability can optionally
(instead or additionally) be provided by predesignating a range of device addresses,
storing these addresses and initializing control registers in the decision-making
module (e.g., the SC) at system initialization, so that all slave read requests to
any devices having addresses within the predesignated range shall be treated as circuit-switched
transactions. This range may include only one address, multiple contiguous addresses,
or noncontiguous addresses, as desired, and may be dynamically redefined by software.
[0133] The subset of transaction requests to be treated as circuit-switched transactions
is itself variable, and may be reconfigured in advance or dynamically in software
(by, e.g., tags); that is, this subset may include only slave read requests, as in
the preferred embodiment, or may instead or additionally include other types of transaction
requests, either those discussed herein or others that may be provided for by the
system controller.
[0134] Other variables may be considered in determining whether to designate transaction
requests as circuit-switched. Since the SC has its own logic 245 (see Figure 2), including
possibly a processor or other appropriate circuitry and/or software as required for
the desired implementation, the criteria available for providing to the SC to make
this determination are quite broad, since they may include either software values
or hardware signals; they may include essentially any variable relating to the system,
including state information of the system or any device or process in it. This will
preferably include the current status of any pending transaction, including information
relating to the states of the master, SC and slave queues; the point in the procedures
illustrated in Figures 3A-3B and 9 which each pending transaction request has reached;
and, generally, the information necessary to restore each variable, queue, etc. to
its state immediately prior to the effective interruption worked by the incoming circuit-switched
request. Mechanisms and principles for storing and restoring system states in responding
to conventional interrupts may, for instance, be applied to the task of storing and
restoring states of the system of the invention in responding to circuit-switched
transaction requests, and can included dedicated hardware and/or program modules as
desired.
[0135] In the hybrid system of the invention, "circuit-switched" effectively means that
the SC can immediately schedule the datapath for the transfer of data from a slave
to a master, upon meeting certain criteria such as receiving a slave read request.
Thus, if it is determined at box 930 that the present transaction is to be treated
as circuit-switched, then the method proceeds to box 935, where other transactions
are suspended or interrupted and their states are saved. The method then proceeds
to box 940, where the SC schedules the data path for this request, which takes place
effectively or actually at the same time as arbitration for the address bus (as in
box 920). This corresponds to event 3 in Figure 9.
[0136] At box 950, the SC encodes the current request to indicate its circuit-switched status.
This status will be detected by the slave upon forwarding of the request thereto,
which occurs at box 960, corresponding to event 4 in Figure 9. Note that if the current
request is a usual packet-switched request, then the method proceeded from box 930
directly to box 960 (in which case the entire procedure will not differ essentially
from that shown in Figures 3A-3B: the packet-switched path is shown here to illustrate
the interaction between Figures 3A-3B and Figure 9).
[0137] At box 965, a wait is executed by the slave relative to this P_REQ, until it reaches
the top of the slave queue. Then, at box 970, the slave evaluates the P_REQ, including
determining whether it is to be circuit-switched (for which a field or tag may be
supplied in the P_REQ), and obtains the read data.
[0138] At box 980, it is determined by the slave whether the current transaction request
is a circuit-switched type. If not, then the method proceeds to box 1020, where the
slave sends its P_REPLY and waits for an S_REPLY to send its data, in accordance with
the procedure described above with respect to Figure 6. Then, at box 1030, the SC
sends its S_REPLY to the master and the slave to commence the transfer of data, the
master receives the data at box 1040, and the normal operation continues as described
in Section I.
[0139] If the determination at box 980 is affirmative, then at box 990 the slave sends its
P_REPLY to the SC, as indicated by event 5 in Figure 9. Then, at box 1000, the SC
sends its S_REPLY to the master to indicate the impending arrival of data from the
slave, corresponding to event 6 in Figure 9.
[0140] At box 1010, the slave sends its data onto the datapath. This corresponds to event
7 in Figure 9, and should take place at some predetermined time later than the sending
of the P_REPLY to the SC at box 990. This predetermined time may be calculated based
upon preselected variables provided to the slave, but is preferably a fixed time (such
as 1 or 2 cycles) later than the P_REPLY. If it is a variable or calculated time,
then the time is preferably communicated to the master with the SC's S_REPLY.
[0141] In either case, the master knows when to expect the data on the datapath, and accordingly
at box 1040 the master receives the data, and normal operation is resumed. This includes
the restoration of all states to their condition just prior to the switching to the
circuit-switched mode. The details of which state data to save and restore will be
implementation-specific
[0142] The principles of incrementing and decrementing the counters, placing requests in
the various queues and issuing them when the devices become available, and so on,
can be implemented in the hybrid system just as they were in the embodiment of the
pure packet-switched system described in Section I above, or in some other suitable
manner: the particulars are not crucial. The hybrid system's most important functions
include taking predesignated transaction requests (such as slave read requests for
certain masters or in certain predefined configurations) out of order, with respect
to other transaction requests, and processing them by scheduling the datapath for
immediate delivery of the requested data, to improve the overall performance of the
system.
[0143] The circuitry and software used to implement the hybrid circuit-switched/packet-switched
system may take on a variety of configurations. As discussed above, they may be implemented
as, for instance, software executed on an ASIC or processor (generally, SC logic 245
in Figure 2), and they will in the preferred embodiment include program modules executed
by the master, the SC and the slave in conjunction with one another. As decisions
are made and actions taken at each of the events 1-7 in Figure 9 and steps of Figure
8, it is most efficient to provide the decision-making capability at the device taking
the action.
[0144] Thus, the SC may include program instructions (a program module) to tag the P_REQ
to identify it as circuit-switched, as in box 950 of Figure 8. In addition, the SC
should determine in box 930 of Figure 8 whether the current P_REQ is in fact of a
predetermined type that should be circuit-switched, or of another type that should
be packet-switched. However, it is equally possible for the master issuing the request
to tag it as circuit-switched, thus removing that decision from the SC; in this case,
the SC will respond to the tag instead of making its own determination. An advantage
of this embodiment is that a new device could be plugged into an existing system,
about which the SC has no information and no decision-making capability (e.g., as
to whether to circuit-switch transaction requests from that device or that type of
device) -- in which case, if the SC is provided in advance with instructions to check
for a "circuit-switch" tag and treat requests with such a tag accordingly, then the
SC need not be modified (either in hardware or software) as new types of devices are
added to the system.
[0145] Even more flexible is an embodiment where the SC has certain predetermined criteria
which are modifiable in its software modules, and further includes a general decision-making
capability (either in hardware or software) to inspect incoming transaction requests
for a circuit-switch tag or field.
[0146] The system controller of the invention may more broadly be defined as a transaction
request controller, i.e. any hardware or software subsystem included by or coupled
to a master and/or a slave, that makes the determinations and executes the operations
necessary to treat some transaction requests as circuit-switched, and others as packet-switched.
Such a transaction request controller need not include all of the details presented
for the preferred embodiment of the system controller in Section I above, though that
preferred embodiment does provide a convenient and efficient architecture for implementing
the invention.
[0147] Another variation on the invention is that a subsystem of a multiprocessor system
may locally, and under certain circumstances, act as a uniprocessor system for the
purposes of the invention. Thus, a given processor may treat slave read requests to
its own local slave devices (those on its local address bus) as priority circuit-switched
events, while treating requests from other processors as packet-switched. This particular
implementation uses an identification of the source of the transaction request as
one criterion for determining in which mode to execute the transaction.
[0148] Thus, given the functions described above and the corresponding flow charts and diagrams,
it will be seen that there is a broad range of architectures and implementations available
that can be used to realize the features of the invention, including, if desired,
placing decision-making capabilities on devices other than those taking the immediate
action or on more than one component of the system.